Saturday, December 19, 2015

How Congress finally killed No Child Left Behind

Speaker John Boehner's September announcement about leaving Congress
was a shock to lawmakers who had been deep in painstaking negotiations
for months on a bill
to replace No Child Left Behind, which President Barack Obama signed
into law this week. Getting a new federal education law was hard enough,
given the many warring constituencies involved. With the exit of the
speaker — a key supporter — lawmakers' plans were again jeopardized.

But then came Paul Ryan.

The new speaker wanted to bring more old-fashioned legislating to
the House. So Sen. Lamar Alexander, an old-fashioned lawmaker, sat next
to Ryan during a visit to the senators' weekly Tuesday lunch, just days
after Ryan was sworn in. He pitched him on the bill, which would replace
the central federal law governing public schools.

“I said, ‘We’ve got a bill for you,’” said Alexander, chairman of the
Senate education committee. “Here’s an opportunity for you to do
something big and bipartisan and successful — and do it in regular
order.”

Rep. John Kline, education chairman in the House, also spoke with
Ryan about the merits of the bill — which had drawn major opposition
from the same conservatives who had pushed Boehner to resign. Weeks
earlier, friends Ryan and Kline had each been trying to edge the other
toward taking the speaker’s gavel. Now,Ryan agreed to support
Kline’s bill. They’d bring it to the House floor for a vote soon, when
Ryan was still new to the speakership and the bill could arguably pass
off as part of Boehner’s legacy, according to Alexander.

The No Child Left Behind bill, momentarily lost in the scramble, was charging forward again.

The uncertainty in Alexander’s parlance had looked like yet another
alligator that was “lurking at every corner” for the education bill over
the course of 2015. There were many: opposition from House
conservatives that led leadership to pull an earlier version of the bill
from the House floor; union-backed calls for less testing that could
have killed support from the Obama administration; a three-hour break
from Senate debate to settle a dispute between Sen. Richard Burr
(R-N.C.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) over school funding that could have
sunk a Senate vote on the bill. At the same time, constituents and
teachers unions were increasingly frustrated with the state of federal
education policy, as evidenced by massive protests against testing and
the Common Core across the country.

But in the end, Boehner’s retirement was ironically a blessing for
the four lawmakers who had confidently guided their bill forward through
marathon markups, a months-long effort to woo skeptical House
conservatives and even chatting up the president on Air Force One. Now,
they had a route back through the House with Ryan’s support, to the
Senate and onto Obama’s desk. The time frame was tight, but it would
keep them from running into any issues with the 2016 elections making it
difficult or toxic to legislate on education.

There was only one issue. The bill wasn’t finished yet.

This year’s work to rewrite No Child Left Behind, the country’s
overarching education law, started the day after the 2014 midterm
elections. Alexander, fresh off a successful reelection bid and expected
chairman of the Senate HELP Committee with Republicans now in control,
gathered aides to tell them his top priority would be replacing the
dated education law.

No Child Left Behind, first passed in 2002, was an ambitious,
bipartisan attempt to close achievement gaps between poor and minority
students and their peers by setting a goal for all students to
eventually become proficient in reading and math. But the law prescribed
tests to measure students achievement, and sanctions for schools who
weren’t yielding improvement. The end result: The law became widely
unpopular and was blamed – many argue, incorrectly – for an explosion of
testing in the states in recent years. An Obama administration attempt
to remedy the situation by offering states waivers from parts of the law
only spurred more acrimony, because the waivers also pushed the Obama
education agenda. The waivers also killed the momentum of earlier
attempts to rewrite No Child Left Behind, dragging the law seven years
past its expiration date.

Rewriting a widely unpopular law may seem like a no-brainer for an
incoming education chairman. But the divisive politics around education
policy had made it extremely difficult to do. Multiple attempts to
rewrite the law since its 2007 expiration had fallen flat. Before last
year’s midterms, an overwhelming majority of education experts polled by
the consulting firm Whiteboard Advisors said replacing No Child Left
Behind would have to wait until well after the 2016 elections — if it
ever happened at all.

Even Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who called on Congress
repeatedly for a new law, suggested that Alexander try working on higher
education policy first, according to a GOP aide.

But constituents in Tennessee and elsewhere had long been crying out
for changes to No Child Left Behind. And Alexander, a former U.S.
education secretary for President George H.W. Bushand the son of a teacher, plowed forward.

He started his chairmanship by dropping a draft bill that, to the
chagrin of Democrats, was stacked with Republican priorities. Sen. Patty
Murray, new as the top Democrat on HELP, sold Alexander on the idea
that the two should work together on a bipartisan bill that could move
through the chamber with the support of both parties. Back in 2001,
Republicans had lined up behind President George W. Bush in support of
No Child Left Behind and its dramatic increase to the federal role in
education. But Alexander now wanted to scale back the federal role, trim
the education secretary power and potentially give states block granted
federal funds that could be converted into school vouchers. These
proposals would have ostracized Democrats, including Obama.

Not only was the conversation the start of months of bipartisan work
between the two senators, it also set the tone for what lawmakers in
both chambers say were upfront, collaborative relationships that were
crucial in nabbing them a victory. Lawmakers joined Alexander for
breakfast in the Senate Dining Room; aides bonded over pizza late at night.

Both sides played the long game, positioning themselves for an
eventual conference and a bill that Obama could sign. During a January
trip to Tennessee on Air Force One for the announcement of a community
college initiative, for example, Alexander explained his plan to the
president, and made a request: He didn’t want the president to threaten
to veto the bill he was negotiating with Murray. The president agreed,Alexander
said. Six months later, when a bill came to the Senate floor that was
in conflict with the administration’s priorities, the White House
stopped short of a veto threat.

In February, House Republicans moved forward with a conservative bill
that had cleared the chamber in 2013. At the time, Kline saw it as a
speedy way to pass an initial bill and position himself with a strongly
conservative proposal as a starting point for conference. But the bill
was scheduled for a vote the same week as a debate over Department of
Homeland Security funding erupted,
and anger from the far right against House leadership was running high.
In the hours leading up to the scheduled vote, it was clear it wasn’t
going to pass. Critics said the bill didn’t do nearly enough to roll
back the federal role in education, anti-Common Core bloggers had spread
misinformation about the bill in the states and the conservative groups
Heritage Action and Club for Growth launched an assault against it.

“I thought we could get to the solution better, quicker, cleaner” by
using a bill that had passed the House before, Kline said. “I made a
mistake.”

Kline and other House Republican supporters including Rep. Todd
Rokita (R-Ind.) worked for months to win support they needed from their
colleagues to bring the bill back up for a vote, discussing the bill in
meetings and one-on-one to skeptics. Months later, in July, it just
barely passed the chamber.
On the other side of the aisle, Rep. Bobby Scott, the education
committee’s top Democrat, was wrestling with the his party’s divide
between unions and education reformers, and preparing for the point when
House Republicans would need his support to keep the ball moving
forward.

Scott and Murray, like most Democrats, have good relationships with
the teachers unions. But in this year’s negotiations, labor was more closely aligned with Republicans on some ofthe
most contentious points of the bill: how often to test students, what
constraints to put on opting out of exams and how states should rate
schools.

Scott, Murray and the White House all wanted to preserve testing
students each year, break out data on test results to show achievement
gaps and use that information to determine when a school needs to change
— as a clear way to ensure poor and minority students don’t fall
through the cracks in the system. And they wanted requirements that
low-performing schools work to change. This was civil rights advocates’
point of view, and they worked closely with the White House and business
groups such as the Chamber of Commerce to advance it.

But teachers unions, who spend tens of millions of dollars each cycle
backing candidates, saw the system differently: No Child Left Behind
created a “test-and-punish” environment where students are drilled on
subjects, and the resources schools are given aren’t taken into account.
They think students would benefit from more flexibility for teachers
and less testing.

Across the country, the “opt-out” movement, strongly supported by
unions, encouraged students to skip standardized tests tied to the
Common Core. In New York state, 20 percent of students skipped tests
last spring. And lawmakers, particularly in the House, heard the
complaints from students, parents and teachers loud and clear. They
introduced multiple, union-backed bills that would cut the number of
federally mandated tests or secure students’ right to opt out of testing
without any consequences for schools.

This posed a particular challenge for Scott and his allies. To
deflect critics Democratic Rep. Suzanne Bonamici put forward a bill that
would encourage states to identify redundant tests and delete them — a
productive way to deflect unions’ demands for getting rid of annual
testing all-together.
The Bonamici proposal was inserted into the broader bill and became
“a trump card that we played almost daily” during conversations with
Democrats this year, Scott said.

By August, the House and Senate had each passed their NCLB bills. In
the Senate, Alexander and Murray had hammered out an agreement that
eventually passed with strong support from both parties.
The White House had held back on threatening to veto the Senate’s
bill. But negotiating a bill that met halfway between the two wasn’t
going to work: Scott and the White House wanted a bill that featured key
aspects, further to the left in some ways than either the House or
Senate versions.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan “still didn’t know” at that point
whether the lawmakers would emerge with a decent bill, Duncan told
POLITICO. “If they came back with a mediocre version of the House bill,
or a mediocre version of the Senate bill, I would have recommended
[Obama] not sign it.”

And so, after months of watching House Republicans wrestle with
moving their bill through the House, Scott — who had views similar to
the White House, and could deliver Democrats’ votes— finally “had a seat at the table,” he said.

Aides began bridging gaps between the two bills in August. By
September, they had made headway on large chunks but despite extensive
discussion couldn’t compromise on the most politically divisive section
of No Child Left Behind: how to evaluate schools and handle them when
they do poorly.
Scott was eager to find a solution that didn’t sacrifice civil rights
principles and satisfied Republicans’ hankering for a return to local
control.

In October, he pitched a plan to Kline: The federal government could
mandate specific circumstances in which states and districts would have
to intervene in a school — for example, in high school “dropout
factories” where few students graduate. But it could give states
significant leeway in both rating schools’ performance and deciding how
to help struggling schools.

After some questions and changes, Kline’s office agreed and, soon after, so did the Senate.

Not long after Ryan became speaker, in mid-November, and with little
time left to wrap negotiations before lawmakers hoped to bring a bill up
in the House, the four key lawmakers dialed in for a conference call.

It was the kind of day, Murray said, that the emerging deal on the education bill “was either going to fall apart, or not.”

They were optimistic. But there were still two gnarly, contentious
issues that had divided lawmakers all year, and they needed to be
resolved swiftly. Aides had been working late at night, sometimes until
dawn. Top Obama administration officials had been woken up in bed for
calls on education policy, two officials said.

Murray, a former preschool teacher, put her foot down during the call
— as she had done many times before — on one of her chief priorities:
The bill had to include a pre-K program, which pained House Republicans’
hankering to cut the number of government programs.

Alexander and Kline argued that the bill had to significantly
restrict future education secretaries’ power to curb the executive
overreach they have said the Obama administration is guilty of.
Democrats, and especially the White House, were nervous that stripping
too much authority from the secretary would make the law unenforceable.

Slowly, each lawmaker gave a little.

Murray would get the program she wanted but stationed at Health and
Human Services over her preference, the Education Department. Kline and
Alexander would get restrictions on the secretary but Democrats won
minimum assurances that the changes wouldn’t go so far as to keep the
department from being able to enforce the law.

It was a deal.

And soon, news trickled out to education advocates and and analysts across Washington. Civil rights advocates became apprehensive
about whether the plan would strong enough on protections for minority
children and those from low-income families. They pushed for small
changes throughout the the bill in conference, even in the days leading
up to it hitting the House floor. They won a tweak, for example, that
would help ensure the federal government could prevent states from
allowing wide swaths of students to opt out of tests. Eventually, they
announced their support.

The Obama administration had last-minutejitters
of its own but said the bill represented a major legislative victory —
even with its restrictions on the education secretary. And The Wall
Street Journal, in a major victory for conservative proponents of the
agreement, declared the bill the biggest devolution of federal power in 25 years.

Kline and Scott took the bill back to the House, where it passed 359-64. A week later, senators voted 85-12 to approve it. The president signed the Every Student Succeeds Actthe next day at the White House, declaring it“a Christmas miracle.”

A day earlier, a beaming Ryan congratulated the conferees on their work during a ceremony at the Capitol.

“This shows what we can do when both parties work together,” Ryan
said. “All of our members have done fine work, and this is a good
moment.”

AN ESSA ADDENDUM from Morning Education:

Our story [above] on how the big education deal got done was packed with juicy
tidbits from over the course of the year. But we couldn't include
everything, and tipsters flagged one other key moment for Morning
Education: The work in the Senate, led by Sens. Chris Murphy, Elizabeth
Warren and Cory Booker and backed by Senate HELP Committee Ranking
Member Patty Murray, to garner votes for an amendment strengthening
accountability provisions in the bill last July. It wasn't a done deal
that Senate Dems would line up behind the pro-accountability measure.
"The accountability conversation sometimes pits two Democratic
constituencies against each other," Murphy told Morning Education. The
lawmakers putting
the measure together "worked hard to put together an amendment that
caused the least amount of antagonism from labor as possible," but the
amendment didn't garner the National Education Association's support.
Supporters like Murphy were working down to the wire to get Democrats to
line up behind their proposal, which they mostly did, and the strong
support sent a message that the party was pro-accountability.

KSN&C

KSN&C

KSN&C is intended to be a place for well-reasoned civil discourse...not to suggest that we don’t appreciate the witty retort or pithy observation. Have at it. But we do not invite the anonymous flaming too often found in social media these days. This is a destination for folks to state your name and speak your piece.

It is important to note that, while the Moderator serves as Faculty Regent for Eastern Kentucky University, all comments offered by the Moderator on KSN&C are his own opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of the Board of Regents, the university administration, faculty, or any members of the university community.

On KSN&C, all authors are responsible for their own comments. See full disclaimer at the bottom of the page.

Why This Blog?

So far as we know, we only get one lifetime. So, when I "retired" in 2004, after 31-years in public education I wanted to do something different. I wanted to teach, write and become a student again. I have since spent a decade in higher ed.

I have listened to so many commentaries over the years about what should be done to improve Kentucky's schools - written largely by folks who have never tried to manage a classroom, run a school, or close an achievement gap. I came to believe that I might have something to offer.

I moved, in 1985, from suburban northern Kentucky to what was then the state’s flagship district - Fayette County. I have had a unique set of experiences to accompany my journey through KERA’s implementation. I have seen children grow to graduate and lead successful lives. I have seen them go to jail and I have seen them die. I have been amazed by brilliant teachers, dismayed by impassive bureaucrats, disappointed by politicians and uplifted by some of Kentucky’s finest school children. When I am not complaining about it, I will attest that public school administration is critically important work.

Democracy is run by those who show up. In our system of government every citizen has a voice, but only if they choose to use it.

This blog is totally independent; not supported or sponsored by any institution or political organization. I will make every effort to fully cite (or link to) my sources. Please address any concerns to the author.

On the campaign trail...with my wife Rita

An action shot: The Principal...as a much younger man.

Faculty Senate Chair

Serving as Mace Bearer during the Inauguration of Michael T. Benson as EKU's 12th president.

Teaching

EDF 203 in EKU's one-room schoolhouse.

Professin'

Lecturing on the history of Berea College to Berea faculty and staff, 2014.

Faculty Regent

One in a long series of meetings. 2016

KSN&C StatCounter

Disclaimer:

By accessing this website (http://theprincipal.blogspot.com) Kentucky School News and Commentary (hereafter KSN&C), a web browser (hereafter user) consents that she or he is familiar with, understands and absolutely accepts the following weblog disclaimer:

The views expressed by the authors and contributors on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Kentucky School News and Commentary, those who link to this website, the author’s employers, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, other ancestors, blood-relatives, progeny, this website’s web host, moderator, designer, or any other organization in any way connected with this website.

While I presently serve as Chair of the Eastern Kentucky University Faculty Senate (August 2014-May 2016), none of the Moderator's comments are official statements attributable to EKU, its Faculty Senate or any of the institution's entities.

In all cases, comments are the personal views of the author. No individual contributor, author or commenter is paid for their opinion or beholden to a particular point of view. All contributors write in the English language and cannot be held responsible for unfortunate translations that may occur in other languages. KSN&C is not responsible for human errors involving grammar and punctuation.

Comments on this website are the sole responsibility of the author. The author assumes full responsibility, liability, and blame for any libel or litigation that may result from something written in or as a direct result of something written in a comment. The accuracy, completeness, veracity, honesty, exactitude, factuality and politeness of comments are not guaranteed. The content on the blog is not intended to malign any religious, ethnic group, club, organization, company or individual. Readers are advised to employ a healthy dose of rationality. Furthermore, information is always in transition. Web links change, and content published today may be out-of-date next week.

Readers are advised that some images used on the site are not the property of KSN&C but are reduced in size and used under fair-use. The same is true of certain copyrighted material. Any concerns should be addressed to the moderator. Due to the episodic nature of the blog, errors, when pointed out, may not be immediately corrected.

All trademarks, service marks, copyrights, registered names, mottos, logos, insignias and marks used or cited by this website are the property of their respective owners and this website in no way accepts any responsibility for an infringement on any of the above.

Despite any claims to the contrary, nothing on this website should be construed as professional advice. The information provided on this website is of a general, wide-ranging nature and cannot substitute for the advice of a licensed legal professional, physician, psychiatrist or member of the clergy. A competent authority with specialized knowledge operating within the Kentucky Department of Education, local public school district, church school, independent private school, home school, or in the journalistic, law enforcement or legal community is the only one who can address or comment on the specific circumstances covered in the news and commented upon herein. For personal advice, please contact your mother, father, BFF, local bar association, local bar tender, law society, medical board, county hospital, pastor, teacher, phone book, online directory, local emergency number in your jurisdiction, or Google to find a or obtain a referral to a competent professional.

This website has no control over the information you access via outbound link(s) in the post text, sidebar, header, footer or comment sections. This website does not endorse linked websites and cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information found by following said links or the correctness of any analysis found therein and should not be held responsible for it or the consequences of a user’s use of that information. In fact, we’re pretty sure we link to falsehoods perpetrated by others with some frequency. Be warned. Twistifications of supposed facts, biased reporting, and bad analysis is de rigueur for some of the sites we link.

This website may inadvertently link to content that is vacuous, obscene, venomous, frivolous, rotten, antagonistic, harsh, rancorous, acrimonious or repetitive. This website in no way condones, endorses or takes responsibility for such content. Please report anything really ugly to KSN&C’s Moderator.

This website publishes content regularly and said content is maintained in reference to the protections afforded it under local, state, martial, federal, international and school yard law. Publication of information found on this website may be in violation of the laws of the city, county, state, country or other jurisdiction from where you are viewing this website’s content and laws in your jurisdiction may not protect or allow the same kinds of speech or distribution. In the case that the laws of the jurisdiction where this website's content is maintained and those of yours conflict, this website does not encourage, condone, facilitate, recommend or protect the violation of any laws and cannot be responsible for any violations of such laws. We do condone lawful efforts to extend free speech protections to all parts of the world.

Because the World Wide Web is an integrated net of communication, discussion and litigation, this website encourages the distribution of its content. Cross, reciprocal or just plain friendly hyper-linking is consistent with this information sharing and this disclaimer should not be construed as a condemnation of any linking practices. That said, any reproduction of this website’s content must credit the website by name and Uniform Resource Locator (URL). Should you link to this domain or use, reproduce, republish, reiterate, imitate, or duplicate the information contained on this website, you alone are responsible for that action and should, under threat of litigation, credit this website by name and URL. In addition, any user who learns of information from this site, but traces back to our attributed sources in an effort to forego proper mention of KSN&C should seek therapy.

This website is not recommended for inmates, ingrates, illiterates, or anyone professing an irrational fear of CATS or any other mammal, or those who have a penchant for bullying or self- aggrandizement. Women who are pregnant or may become pregnant or are nursing are advised to consult their physician before reading this website. Eating before reading may result in indigestion. This website contains small pieces and is not recommended for children under the age of 4.